Re: Is Roger Goodell Good For the NFL?
 

Well obviously im pretty bias when it comes to some of the things Roger has done so maybe Im letting that sway me, but like all organizations I think you can point to the top when applying blame or credit for all big ticket decisions. I doubt he has had any input in the matter, although as the commissioner i would hope he is part of major decision making.

Re: Is Roger Goodell Good For the NFL?
 

Yeah, just not sure the SB halftime act is high on his list of priorities. Something tells me someone else handles those types of decisions.

Re: Is Roger Goodell Good For the NFL?
 

[quote=Mattyk;844419]You think he hand picks the SB halftime act?

I know you don't like the guy but this is a bit of a reach[/quote]

A bit of a reach indeed. I'm not a Madonna fan either but at least it'll be an opportunity to load up on drinks and snacks lol.

Re: Is Roger Goodell Good For the NFL?
 

He's gotten the NFL so much more popular and that's all that matters. He's a marketing genius.

Re: Is Roger Goodell Good For the NFL?
 

Rog hit Paul up with a fine thats equal to an after tax game check. Maybe Paul can get on the NFL's payment plan....

[URL="http://www.sbnation.com/nfl/2011/10/5/2471718/niles-paul-fined-austin-pettis"]Niles Paul Fined For Hit On Austin Pettis; Rams WR Says He Should Appeal - SBNation.com[/URL]

I really dont understand why guys getting paid 360k are fined the same amount as a guy like Suh with 40 million guaranted.

Re: Is Roger Goodell Good For the NFL?
 

[quote=redskin90;844761]He's gotten the NFL so much more popular and that's all that matters. He's a marketing genius.[/quote]

That's 100% BS. You can thank Pete Rozelle for taking the game to where it is today.

Re: Is Roger Goodell Good For the NFL?
 

I don't understand all this halftime BS at the Super Bowl. It's just pure garbage. The only performance that totally blew me away was U2. After they did it it should've been done away with.

Re: Is Roger Goodell Good For the NFL?
 

[quote=mlmpetert;841974]Goodell said that he wants 2 Lodon games next year:

[URL="http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2011/09/28/two-london-games-could-be-coming-for-2012/"]Two London games could be coming for 2012 | ProFootballTalk[/URL][/quote]


Maybe the plan will be to host them in smaller stadiums:

[url=http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2011/10/06/nfls-uk-spokesman-confirms-sales-for-bears-bucs-are-slow/]NFL’s UK spokesman confirms sales for Bears-Bucs are slow | ProFootballTalk[/url]

Re: Is Roger Goodell Good For the NFL?
 

[quote=skinsfan69;845272]I don't understand all this halftime BS at the Super Bowl. It's just pure garbage. The only performance that totally blew me away was U2. After they did it it should've been done away with.[/quote]

I agree that U2 was good. But even then they had to play a bullshit medley because time was so short. The halftime show never allows the band time to do anything substantial so it is always frilly and superficial.

Re: Is Roger Goodell Good For the NFL?
 

[quote=skinsfan69;845271]That's 100% BS. You can thank Pete Rozelle for taking the game to where it is today.[/quote]

Goodell is more responsible for where the league is today than a guy who was commissioner 20+ years ago. Rozelle did a lot but it was a long time ago. The league isn't like it was even 10 years ago. Although I wouldn't argue that Goodell is the main reason for how popular the league is by any stretch.

Re: Is Roger Goodell Good For the NFL?
 

Who really cares about the halftime show anyway? I can't remember the last time I even watched it.

Re: Is Roger Goodell Good For the NFL?
 

[quote=Mattyk;845311]Who really cares about the halftime show anyway? I can't remember the last time I even watched it.[/quote]

Truth

Re: Is Roger Goodell Good For the NFL?
 

Halftime is for peeing and making nachos.

Re: Is Roger Goodell Good For the NFL?
 

[quote=FRPLG;845310]Goodell is more responsible for where the league is today than a guy who was commissioner 20+ years ago. Rozelle did a lot but it was a long time ago. The league isn't like it was even 10 years ago. Although I wouldn't argue that Goodell is the main reason for how popular the league is by any stretch.[/quote]

How is he more responsible for how popular it is today? Give me one example of what he's done. Rozelle, Paul T. and a few of the old time owners are truly the ones who made this league what it is today. Not Roger Goodell. All Roger Goodell has done is cause controversy, piss off the players and try to get Eurpope to buy into american football.

Re: Is Roger Goodell Good For the NFL?
 

@Skinsfan: Yeah i strongly believe Goodell is just riding the remaining coattails of Rozelle and Tagliabue, of which anyone could do with little effort for a very long time. In fact I think any commissioner follow those 2 could make very unpopular decisions without drastic ramifactions due to their groundwork. Perhaps that’s Goodells role, do the things no one else wants to do (but thinks should be done), take the blame for it, make his money and step down when the new savior commissioner is ready to step in. My issues with him are with his inconsistencies, inability to articulate rules, and his push to limit defenses and advance offenses and scoring.

@Alvin & Matty: I agree that halftime shows suck and are for nachos, peeing, refilling, smoking, talking, or filliping to the puppy bowl. But since no one really watches it and the media only talks about it to slam it, don’t you think that’s something Roger should attempt to change? Imagine if he made it watchable and liked, how crazy would that be????

I know how much everyone likes Chris Chase so heres his take on Paul’s game check fine:

[URL="http://sports.yahoo.com/nfl/blog/shutdown_corner/post/Rookie-fined-20-000-for-hit-player-he-hit-tell?urn=nfl-wp8792"]Rookie fined $20,000 for hit; player he hit tells him to appeal - Shutdown Corner - NFL*Blog - Yahoo! Sports[/URL]

Re: Is Roger Goodell Good For the NFL?
 

I don't understand why fines are not adjusted to the player's salary. It doesn't make sense to fine a rookie making the minimum salary the same amount as a superstar who makes millions.

Re: Is Roger Goodell Good For the NFL?
 

[quote=skinsfan69;845342]How is he more responsible for how popular it is today? Give me one example of what he's done. Rozelle, Paul T. and a few of the old time owners are truly the ones who made this league what it is today. Not Roger Goodell. [B]All Roger Goodell has done is cause controversy, piss off the players and try to get Eurpope to buy into american football[/B].[/quote]

Okie dokie.

Re: Is Roger Goodell Good For the NFL?
 

[quote=Mattyk;845311]Who really cares about the halftime show anyway? I can't remember the last time I even watched it.[/quote]

This.

Re: Is Roger Goodell Good For the NFL?
 

I hate the isolationist mentality. Why not grow the sport abroad?

I think developing the game overseas only helps the game grow and reach greater heights. It also increases the player talent pool. Hardcore Brits probably hate that the international community has invested hard in US soccer, but we in turn have provided some great talent back to the EPl. The likes of Tim Howard, Stuart Holden, Brad Friedel, Clint Dempsey, etc. A win-win.

The more I talk to people about their concerns the more it seems their main issue is they dislike uk/europe and rather preserve the NFL as a US only brand. It turns more into a globalization vs. isolation debate.

Re: Is Roger Goodell Good For the NFL?
 

[quote=FRPLG;845422]Okie dokie.[/quote]

[COLOR=black][FONT=Verdana]Can you name anything game related that he has done that hasnt caused significant controversy or pissed players and fans off, besides forcing NFL on Europe? I can think of a couple things. [/FONT][/COLOR]
[COLOR=black][FONT=Verdana] [/FONT][/COLOR]
[COLOR=black][FONT=Verdana]1) Hes cleaned the NFL up so to speak. I personally feel that this should be left to the individual teams as I think they should be able to brand themselves as they want to, but I commend his efforts and think that overall its a great thing.[/FONT][/COLOR]
[COLOR=black][FONT=Verdana] [/FONT][/COLOR]
[COLOR=black][FONT=Verdana]2)Breast Cancer Awareness. I think Snyder had a big hand in this too. Im against Breast Cancer (and any other cancer) as much as anyone else is. I think that the NFL’s promotion of breast cancer awareness and desire to help fight for the cure is nothing short of a great thing. Although I have to say it has a pandering to expand the females demographic type feel to it. Breast cancer charities are a easy thing anyone can and should absolutely get behind, although I ask if it was another disease (like MS or AIDS) would the NFL be as supportive if there was no pay off for them? Either way I think its great they are involved in this cause and hope that they become involved in more. [/FONT][/COLOR]
[COLOR=black][FONT=Verdana] [/FONT][/COLOR]
[COLOR=black][FONT=Verdana]3)NFL Play 60. Encourages kids to not be fat and play video games all day. Definitely a good thing for kids and the NFL.[/FONT][/COLOR]
[COLOR=black][FONT=Verdana] [/FONT][/COLOR]
[COLOR=black][FONT=Verdana]All the positive things hes done are reflective of current social issues which is great. But when it comes to the game everything hes done is cloudy in controversy. Do you know of any that’s not?[/FONT][/COLOR]

Re: Is Roger Goodell Good For the NFL?
 

[quote=hooskins;845424]I hate the isolationist mentality. Why not grow the sport abroad?

I think developing the game overseas only helps the game grow and reach greater heights. It also increases the player talent pool. Hardcore Brits probably hate that the international community has invested hard in US soccer, but we in turn have provided some great talent back to the EPl. The likes of Tim Howard, Stuart Holden, Brad Friedel, Clint Dempsey, etc. A win-win.

The more I talk to people about their concerns the more it seems their main issue is they dislike uk/europe and rather preserve the NFL as a US only brand. It turns more into a globalization vs. isolation debate.[/quote]

[COLOR=black][FONT=Verdana]Im only against it because its only Roger only wants to target London. I thinks its ridiculous to have teams fly over to London and back to play a game, its just to far. Maybe if the NFL gave them Lear jets to use id be more for it. [/FONT][/COLOR]
[COLOR=black][FONT=Verdana][/FONT][/COLOR]
[COLOR=black][FONT=Verdana]The NFL used to hold games all around the world, why not do that. I think its great that the Bills are trying to expand to Taranto and id rather see a team in Canada or Mexico before I see one in LA. I also thought NFL Europe was a great thing and actually could accomplish everything you mentioned in expanding the game and talent pool but Roger cancelled it his second year on the job. [/FONT][/COLOR]

Re: Is Roger Goodell Good For the NFL?
 

I think they are targeting London, from understanding, because its the only countries not in the Americas where the sport could/should grow. ALthough the travel would be a pain, if you cycle all teams it is equal. If there is a way to have the London game before bye weeks, for the teams playing that would ease some of the concerns too. I agree with developing opportunities in Canada and Mexico. Although I think there may be some loops to jump through in Canada due to the CFL?

Also, from all accounts, the large scale effort, that was NFL Europe was a financial failure and mess. I think Goodell feels focusing on the NFL in the US while slowly growing overseas (via a few overseas games) will help the sport develop in the long run. I assume it is also less of a financial burden.

Re: Is Roger Goodell Good For the NFL?
 

[quote=hooskins;845424]I hate the isolationist mentality. Why not grow the sport abroad?

I think developing the game overseas only helps the game grow and reach greater heights. It also increases the player talent pool. Hardcore Brits probably hate that the international community has invested hard in US soccer, but we in turn have provided some great talent back to the EPl. The likes of Tim Howard, Stuart Holden, Brad Friedel, Clint Dempsey, etc. A win-win.

The more I talk to people about their concerns the more it seems their main issue is they dislike uk/europe and rather preserve the NFL as a US only brand. It turns more into a globalization vs. isolation debate.[/quote]

Yea, globalization is awesome.
It sure helped keep manufacturing jobs here.

Re: Is Roger Goodell Good For the NFL?
 

AW,

Here is a novel thought. Instead of grasping on industries we are inefficient in why not invest in to technologies and fields we would have a global comparative advantage? Continuing to prop up industries (beyond the ones that are needed for national defense) only increases economic inefficiencies in the global market. Also it is very short sighted, because in the LR we are not going to sustain ourselves in the same way we did 20, 30 50 years ago.

No need for drastic changes and hurting families and businesses dependent on manufacturing. But gradual and thought out national policy would go a long way. If we would have thought a bit more in that light, there current economic situation would have been easier to get out of.

We're not going to miss a game due to labor stoppage for at least the next ten years. That's impressive and the league has been actively talking to Germany about playing a game there one day so it's not just London

Re: Is Roger Goodell Good For the NFL?
 

[quote=hooskins;845441]AW,

Here is a novel thought. Instead of grasping on industries we are inefficient in why not invest in to technologies and fields we would have a global comparative advantage? Continuing to prop up industries (beyond the ones that are needed for national defense) only increases economic inefficiencies in the global market. Also it is very short sighted, because in the LR we are not going to sustain ourselves in the same way we did 20, 30 50 years ago.

No need for drastic changes and hurting families and businesses dependent on manufacturing. But gradual and thought out national policy would go a long way. If we would have thought a bit more in that light, there current economic situation would have been easier to get out of.[/quote]

Having worked in an automotive and housing material manufacturing environment for most of my life I have a hard time taking your comments seriously. Coulda/woulda/shoulda.......
Globalization sucks.
And I really dont want to miss any Redskin games because they are playing the Hamburg Schnitzelboys at 3:00 am.

Re: Is Roger Goodell Good For the NFL?
 

They had the Euro league once before and it failed, so none of the Euro expansion talk bullcrap. I don't mind the overseas game every once in a blue moon, but they care about American football as much as we do soccer.

Re: Is Roger Goodell Good For the NFL?
 

AW,

A good amount of my family is from the Detroit area directly employed by the automotive industry. So I completely understand your perspective, but I am not letting my personal ties cloud my economic judgment.

It is not a good policy to prop up an industry by not "allowing" foreign competition. It is not sustainable nor is it sound. As long as the industry is not an infant industry or one pertinent to national security we should welcome foreign competition to make our product better. The proper way to "protect" an industry is to invest in R and D. If R and D is not deemed enough then invest in another industry.

Re: Is Roger Goodell Good For the NFL?
 

[quote=hooskins;845518]AW,

A good amount of my family is from the Detroit area directly employed by the automotive industry. So I completely understand your perspective, but I am not letting my personal ties cloud my economic judgment.

It is not a good policy to prop up an industry by not "allowing" foreign competition. It is not sustainable nor is it sound. As long as the industry is not an infant industry or one pertinent to national security we should welcome foreign competition to make our product better. The proper way to "protect" an industry is to invest in R and D. If R and D is not deemed enough then invest in another industry.[/quote]

LOL...you think its that simple?
What textbook did you get that from?

And I never said anything about not allowing anything nor am I for propping up things, like GM if thats what you're referring to.
I'm saying America needs to get back to manufacturing for its own sake.
Manufacturing facilities create a metric feckload of jobs.
And that is what this nation needs now more than anything.

I welcome competition. It drives quality and innovation improvements.
I also want to crush it.

We dont "need" a global market. However we are stuck with it.

Re: Is Roger Goodell Good For the NFL?
 

[quote=hooskins;845439]I think they are targeting London, from understanding, because its the only countries not in the Americas where the sport could/should grow. ALthough the travel would be a pain, if you cycle all teams it is equal. If there is a way to have the London game before bye weeks, for the teams playing that would ease some of the concerns too. I agree with developing opportunities in Canada and Mexico. Although I think there may be some loops to jump through in Canada due to the CFL?

Also, from all accounts, the large scale effort, that was NFL Europe was a financial failure and mess. I think Goodell feels focusing on the NFL in the US while slowly growing overseas (via a few overseas games) will help the sport develop in the long run. I assume it is also less of a financial burden.[/quote]

You cant cycle all the teams to London equally or season ticket holders will get PISSED. A lot of people factor in the cost of preseason game tickets into the cost of regular season tickets treating it kind of like a tax. So if the ticket's face value is 100 dollars each with 8 home games many season ticket holders look at it like its really a 125 dollar ticket, because 200 bucks was spent on preseason games. If you loose a regular season home game that 200 bucks is spread out over 7 games now, not 8. So it only makes sense for franchises that have problems selling out to go to London, and why we keep seeing the Bucs going overseas. The funny thing is that by continuing to go overseas you disinsensitive your fan base to become season ticket holders. Its kind of like the paradox of thrift.

Either way Rog loves those limeys (the only derogatory term i could find for brits):

[url=http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2011/10/09/goodell-reiterates-that-second-london-game-could-be-coming/]Goodell reiterates that second London game could be coming | ProFootballTalk[/url]

[quote]At a time when Goodell likes to say that fans prefer 18 regular-season games, he should ask the fans what they think about sending an extra game to London each year.[/quote]